CosmoCoffee Forum Index CosmoCoffee

 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch  MemberlistSmartFeed   MemberlistMemberlist    RegisterRegister 
   ProfileProfile   Log inLog in 
Arxiv New Filter | Bookmarks & clubs | Arxiv ref/author:

[CosmoMC] - convergence is not achieved after ~ week
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    CosmoCoffee Forum Index -> Computers and software
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Ira *Wolfson



Joined: 24 Jan 2013
Posts: 63
Affiliation: BGU
PostPosted: June 20 2017  Reply with quote
Hi,

I am currently running 3 instances of CosmoMC with the following .ini configuration:
Code:

#general settings
#Bicep-Keck-Planck, varying cosmological parameters
DEFAULT(batch2/BKPlanck.ini)

#general settings
DEFAULT(batch2/common.ini)

#e.g. to vary r in addition to standard 6:
#(for r>0 also need compute_tensors=T)
compute_tensors = T
param[r] = 0.03 0 2 0.04 0.04
param[tau] = 0.07

#high for new runs
MPI_Max_R_ProposeUpdate = 30

propose_matrix= planck_covmats/base_TT_lowTEB_plik.covmat

#Folder where files (chains, checkpoints, etc.) are stored
root_dir = chains/TEST/

#Root name for files produced
file_root=test1
#action= 0 runs chains, 1 importance samples, 2 minimizes
#use action=4 just to quickly test likelihoods
action = 0

#expected result for -(log like)
test_check_compare = 28.337

num_threads = 0

#if you want to get theory cl for test point
#test_output_root = output_cl_root
[b]
start_at_bestfit =F #T[/b]
feedback=2
use_fast_slow = T

checkpoint = T
stop_on_error=F
#sampling_method=7 is a new fast-slow scheme good for Planck
sampling_method = 7
dragging_steps  = 3
propose_scale = 2

#Set >0 to make data files for importance sampling
indep_sample=0

#these are just small speedups for testing
get_sigma8=T

#Uncomment this if you dont want one 0.06eV neutrino by default
#num_massive_neutrinos=
#to vary parameters set param[name]= center, min, max, start width, propose width
#param[mnu] = 0 0 0 0 0



The difference between the 3 runs are the following:
2 runs on CosmoMC-master - one that starts at best fit and one that doesn't.
and 1 run on CosmoMC-Nov2016 that doesn't start at best fit.


All of these runs, at this point are running for over a week. And some for more.

The 2 runs that don't start at best fit show convergence statistics, at the level of ~0.2

All previous tests (i.e. test.ini, test_planck.ini) were successful.

Any idea what might be going wrong?

It seems as maybe there is some noise that prevents the MC from settling into the minimum point of the underlying data's phase space.

Also I have hunch it might have to do with the optical depth?

– Ira
Back to top
View user's profile [ Hidden ] Visit poster's website
Antony Lewis



Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 1332
Affiliation: University of Sussex
PostPosted: June 20 2017  Reply with quote
It's probably because you have large numbers of unconstrained standard LCDM parameters (ns, Ωbh2, etc), since you are not including Planck high L.

For BKP only runs there's a supplied batch2/BKPlanckonly.ini (likewise for newer BK14).
Back to top
View user's profile [ Hidden ] Visit poster's website
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    CosmoCoffee Forum Index -> Computers and software All times are GMT + 5 Hours
Page 1 of 1

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group. Sponsored by WordWeb online dictionary and dictionary software.